You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

I think the need for balance becomes irrelevant if we live in a world void of pain, negative emotions, etc... Having hardships throughout the course of one's life is beneficial in the world we live in because they enable the construction of our psychological and physical defenses. Without the need for defenses, what would be the benefit of having balance?

Basically, it would be all the fun of rolling on X with none of the iffy side effects

this is precisely what i'm saying only in a more general form. Thank You!

So what if you could achieve all these things without their "dark side", why wouldn't it be a life worth living? A world without the law of diminishing marginal utility. Suffering is exactly why it is so hard to imagine a world of constant positive emotions and neverending pleasure.

If those things could even be achieved without their dark side, that was my point, what catalyst would people have to do anything? to grow or innovate at all, if they had nothing to overcome? Suffering is the whole reason why anyone even cares enough to even imagine "a world of constant positive emotions and neverending pleasure." hence why the idea of "heaven" and other similar concepts materialized within various cultures.

Originally Posted by Litvyak

What would be "the point"? Why does it need "a point"?
Does suffering have "a point", or is it more that you post-rationalize shit by saying it is necessary for being a counterweight to all the good things?
Everybody could be happy in their little microcosm, even people who enjoy suffering.

It is necessary, at least in my opinion, if you have no idea what darkness is, never experienced it, how do you compare it to the light? can you fully appreciate something good without ever knowing anything different? would we really be happy? would we really experience pleasure? if there is no reference point for either how would we even know or care? I am fairly certain the whole point was that it would be a complete paradise devoid of any suffering, others couldn't opt out by definition of that statement, so I would be forcing this "paradise" on many it seems do not want it,

Why would you insist on being human if you had better options?[/QUOTE]

Who says it is a better option? being constantly consumed by pleasure, focused on ones own selfish little world of fake happiness, is not what I would personally consider better, facing adversity, suffering, and rising above it all, coming out of it a better person, making the choice to live a happier healthier life, and still loving others and doing what you can to reduce their suffering and bring happiness to their lives, that makes you better than being simply human... imposing a fake magical happiness on the whole world, although I understand why one would want to (im still not entirely sure what id choose, but you are making me leans more toward not wanting to open the box...) would make you a wonderful awesome transcendent being, taking all that suffering on yourself to make them all happy, but you destroy any chance they have of making the same choice, you enslave them to your choice, and destroy their potential.

That being said, if they had the choice on whether or not to opt in/out, if they could try a trial period lets say "ok, I will go along with this for a year, then turn back to normal and decide whether I wanna be this way for the rest of my life." then id say ok, I will open the box... but I just dont think I would feel right doing something that destroys every ones potential, takes away all of their choice in the matter... really, it seems like a control trip...

But these are just my feelings/beliefs on the matter, and I have not said at any point that others should feel the same, however you seem quite invested in your opinions on it, and thats ok, we can feel/believe differently on this, especially since its a complete hypothetical scenario that will never be possible, so there is no reason to let this discussion get to intense.

Suffering is relative regardless of technology. It won't disappear, but this is exactly what creates the meaning of "progress." We seek better medicine. We seek better quality of living. We seek evolution. We want to go higher. The only problem is if we fall down. "Ow! I got touched!" ---> "Ow! You chopped my arm off!" Elevation conflicts with gravity. But why stop now?

Although this may seem somewhat harsh, I feel as though the pain and suffering that does occur is sort of...our challenge? If there was none of that, sure life would be simple, but....

There was this short story I read WAY back in middle school, I wish I could remember the name (and hopefully I'm remembering this correctly) but it was about a paradise of sorts where life was simply a paradise and humans had grown accustomed to there never being anything wrong during the day. A time traveller, I believe, went to this time and the humans there were weak and soft. There was nothing to keep them going other than life's pleasures. Though at night, I think all the monsters came out and killed them if they were still out. O_O But I could just be imagining that last part, bahaha. Either way, I think suffering and challenges are what make humans...human. Without it, what in the hell is the point of living? If you have nothing to compare pleasure to (pain?), then you can't possibly understand how great it is.

Also, I have no interest in immortality. I also would keep the box closed.